WE'VE COME FULL CIRCLE
>We really need a list of name
Of Dominion?
Dominion Voting Systems - START DIGGING >>11509939
Following the request, Smartmatic and Sequoia submitted a request to be reviewed by the CFIUS while also denying links to the Venezuelan government.[105] The company disclosed that it was owned by Antonio Mugica (78.8%), Alfredo Anzola (3.87%), Roger Pinate (8.47%), Jorge Massa Dustou (5.97%) and employees (2.89%).[106] Smartmatic subsequently sold Sequoia and later withdrew from Cook County in December 2006.[107]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Mugica
Antonio Mugica
Career
In the late 1990s, Mugica along with two other Venezuelan colleagues, Alfredo José Anzola and Roger Pinate, created a system where thousands of inputs could be placed into a network simultaneously. Early trials of this system were used on ATMs in Mexico, though after the 2000 United States presidential election, they decided instead to dedicate the system toward electoral functions.[2]
Mugica has been an advocate for electronic and internet voting,[3] election modernization,[4] and digital democracy.[5] Some of his views to bring in technological advancement in elections include: the need to create tools for engaging citizens through voting and participation in the governance process,[6] making voting more accessible,[7] making sure that comprehensive pre- and post-election audits become a common practice,[8] and the significance of investing in research and development in the election technology market.[9][10]
Smartmatic
Smartmatic formed out of the SBC organization that was owned 51% by Smartmatic, 47% Venezuelan state telecommunications organization CANTV and 2% by an affiliated company, Bizta, also owned by the owners of Smartmatic, with a board member from the Bolivarian government during the time an industry-fostering loan from a government institution was in force. In 2004 Smartmatic was granted a contract worth $128 million with the CNE, the government's elections agency, to acquire its products (an automated voting system, voting machines and support services) for the Regional Elections scheduled for that year's 2nd semester. But then, after collecting the required number of citizens' signatures, the 2004 Venezuelan recall referendum was activated to remove Hugo Chávez from the presidency, and Smartmatic had to hastily tailor the Voting System to the changed requirements.
Smartmatic's election technology has been used in local and national elections in Venezuela, the United States, Belgium, Brazil, Ecuador, Argentina, Chile, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Estonia[11] and the Philippines.
>Antonio Mugica
>Antonio Mugica
THE FOUNDER OF SMARTMATIC ALSO WRITES CHILDRENS BOOKS.
Smartmatic CEO and member of SGO. Investing in Democracy, E-voting, Privacy and Identity, and Clean Tech to maximize Social Impact.
https://twitter.com/antoniomugica?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sim%C3%B3n_Bol%C3%ADvar_University_(Venezuela)
FOUNDER OF SMARTMATIC WENT T O SAME COLLEGE AS HUGO CHAVEZ
Polling company: Venezuela election results “manipulated” (SMARTMATIC)
August 2, 2017 at 11:31 a.m.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/08/02/polling-company-venezuela-election-results-manipulated/
https://archive.is/Ez5Ym
CARACAS, Venezuela – Election results decried by government opponents as a brazen power grab were manipulated by at least 1 million votes, the company that provided Venezuela with its voting system said Wednesday.
Antonio Mugica, chief executive of London-based Smartmatic, which has provided technology for Venezuelan elections since 2004, said it detected an inflated turnout figure Sunday through the nation’s automated balloting system.
“With the deepest regret, we have to say that the turnout data presented on Sunday, July 30, for the constituent election was manipulated,” Mugica said at a news conference in London.
His company’s analysis of the data, Mugica said, suggested an inflated number of “at least 1 million” – a potentially important difference that would allow the government to claim a higher turnout than an opposition-held unofficial ballot last month.
The announcement adds to growing allegations of massive irregularities in the election, which selected a new pro-government super congress with vast powers to change the constitution and supplant the opposition-controlled National Assembly.
The vote has been internationally condemned. The Trump administration, which slapped sanctions on President Nicolás Maduro on Monday, described it as a “sham election” that has turned Venezuela into a de facto dictatorship.
Responding to the company’s disclosure, Luis Almagro, secretary general of the Organization of American States, tweeted: “The biggest electoral fraud in Latin America’s history in percentage and in millions of votes is confirmed.”
In a sense, there was no way the government could lose Sunday’s vote. All candidates, including the wife and son of Maduro, were backers of the Socialist administration. There was also no threshold of voter participation needed for the outcome to be valid.
But obtaining a high turnout was considered vital to proving public enthusiasm for the new Constituent Assembly that gives the government effective control over all branches of government. Polls show the new body – and Maduro himself – both deeply unpopular.
The government claimed a turnout of 41.5 percent – more than 8 million votes. That figure would be highly symbolic if true, as it is greater than an unofficial ballot held by the opposition last month in which it said that nearly 7.6 million Venezuelans turned out to reject plans for the new, all-powerful legislature.
Typically, Mugica said, the election system is designed to provide figures that are reviewed and confirmed by auditors. At each table at voting centers, there are witnesses from different parties who can compare their results with the ones published by the electoral council online.
By adding all of those together, it is generally possible to compare and confirm results, he said. Auditors from different parties are also present in counting rooms, where they can access totals reported by the automated system.
That wasn’t possible last Sunday.
“In this case, there were no witnesses,” he said.
However, the automated election system used in Venezuela is designed to self-report any attempt to interfere with it, the company said, meaning alerts are produced by possible manipulation. The system, the company said, has fail-safe systems to prevent circumventing the controls.
The opposition boycotted Sunday’s vote. On Tuesday, two top opposition leaders who were under house arrest were taken away by security forces to a military-run detention camp.
Also Tuesday, one of the five directors of the country’s election system broke with the body’s official position validating the vote, saying he could not “guarantee the veracity of the results.”
That director, Luis Emilio Rondon, tweeted Wednesday that Smartmatic’s announcement had confirmed his assessment of fraud.
“The electoral commission has to respond to the country for the denouncements made today by Smartmatic about manipulation of turnout numbers,” Rondon tweeted. He added, “the electoral body is obliged to conduct an audit process to clarify this situation as soon as possible.”
On Wednesday, the Reuters news agency reported that it had reviewed internal electoral council data showing that only 3.7 million people had voted by 5:30 p.m. Most polling stations closed at 7 p.m., but some stayed open later.